Changing the Course


| | |

Eric Massa's picture

CrossKosed from:  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/29/14656/494

First the good news

The momentum continues to grow here in the New York 29th with an incredible series of positive developments over the past week. First, this week started with the launch of a new television ad from my campaign featuring the next Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer. Watch it here.

This Thursday, October 26th, the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) added my name to the prestigious "Red to Blue" list of the top races in the country. In the release Chris Van Hollen, Co-Chair of the Red to Blue program, noted that I offer "a real alternative to the rubber stamp agenda of Randy Kuhl." The DCCC's elevation of the race is an indication that national party leaders have finally come to recognize what you and I have known all along--that come this November 7th, the 29th District will indeed go from Red to Blue.

That was also the sentiment earlier this week when the Evans-Novak Report published its latest ratings of House races. "Rep. Randy Kuhl (R) in District 29 has seen his support among women evaporate," said the October 25th report, before going on to categorize the race as "Leaning Democratic Takeover." This rating is particularly significant in light of the Evans-Novak analysis of several other upstate New York races--including those of Dan Maffei and Kirsten Gillibrand--which are described as "Leaning Republican Retention."

That rating followed close upon the heels of Ken Rudin, NPR's `Political Junkie,' who put the our race in the "tossup" category of his column. Shortly thereafter, the non-partisan National Journal moved the race up three places on its list of the most competitive races in the country.

Also in the media, the November issue of MONEY Magazine, which hit newsstands across the country this week, features an in-depth article about my race. Ryan D'Agostino (now of Esquire Magazine) followed me around for several days, including coming on the road with the campaign during Max Cleland's visit last month, and put together a fantastic piece about the financial side of running for office.

Finally, according to the most recent FEC filings, I have more than $100,000 more cash on hand than my opponent--a direct result of two things: 1) the incredible support I have received from countless contributors across the District and the country (especially the Netroots community) and 2) my opponent's massive investment in a smear campaign.

About that smear campaign...

Two important articles in the Washington Post cover the dirty political ads this year and the situation in Iraq.  What the two articles fail to do is draw the connection between those two topics.  And that connection is crucial to understanding the voting options on November 7.  The reason Republicans are running such consistently dirty negative ads is that they want to change the subject from the failures in Iraq to anything else.  And the reason things have gone so poorly in Iraq is that the White House and its allies in congress wanted to use Iraq as a political tool against Democrats rather than do the right thing.

These dirty ads we are seeing are a tacit admission by the Republican party that Democrats have been right about Iraq all along.  But we need to change the course in more than just Iraq.  We have lots of other issues that Republicans have failed to address.  Wages are stagnant. Health care costs continue to skyrocket.  We are held hostage to foreign oil producers.  The list of failures could go on indefinitely.

It all comes down to priorities.  Republicans would rather stay in power than do the right thing in Iraq.  That's the choice they made with the "cut and run" nonsense we  saw earlier this year.  And their other priority is to govern in favor of corporate interests.  We have government of by and for big oil, the prescription drug industry and other corporate interests.  With priorities like these, we get lie after lie as the White House and its allies try to hide their real priorities.

Social Security ads in NY-29 as an example

In NY-29, my opponent has run two ads that were meant to deceive the public into thinking he supports the interests of our seniors.  But the truth is that Kuhl has been a dependable supporter of the President's privatization agenda, an agenda so obviously flawed that it has already been rejected once even with a Republican controlled congress.  Kuhl's second ad is particularly troublesome because it shows senior citizens in the sights of a sniper rifle.  

More insidious than the content of my opponent's attacks the use of these outrageous, offensive, scare tactics.  This is truly a new low for my opponent and his allies in the NRCC. How dare he play politics with the tragedy of gun violence. In recent weeks, school shootings across the country have drawn national attention to the issue of gun violence. Moreover, with American casualties in Iraq on the rise once more, images of this kind have become nearly impossible to escape. Moreover, how can a man of Randy Kuhl's experience advocate gun violence on television? Surely he, more than most, with his background as a legislator and attorney, ought to be sensitive to these issues.

Not only is this irresponsible, it is insensitive to those people here in our district who have suffered from such crimes. You can see the two ads here and  here.  One local political expert consulted by channel 18 in Elmira called the ad political pornography.

I talked about the social security lies in a previous diary here and last Thursday my campaign manager issued an ultimatum to the Kuhl campaign to stop the negative ads or we would tell the truth to voters. But back to the bigger issues,  Kuhl exemplifies what Republicans are doing nationally.  All these dirty ads are meant to distract from failures in Iraq and hide the true Republican agendas.

Respond Hard

We have to respond to all these negative ads. In response to Kuhl's persistent reliance upon lies and slander, my campaign issued a challenge earlier this week, calling upon him to renounce these tactics, make good upon his pledge to run a positive campaign, and immediately pull all of his negative ads. Sadly, he refused to do so.

I have endeavored throughout this campaign to keep the debate squarely focused upon the issues facing the people of this district, and to ensure a higher standard of debate. On October 10th, on live television, I took the same pledge as my opponent, to run a strictly positive campaign. It was less than an hour before he broke that pledge while I have continued to remain upbeat, positive, and issue oriented.

However, in the face of his repeated, outrageous, and offensive lies, I feel that I have an obligation to the voters of the 29th District to ensure that the truth is told. Accordingly, my campaign has now released an ad that calls my opponent to task for his lies and misrepresentations. I still truly believe that the voters prefer a higher standard of debate, but I also believe that the voters deserve the truth, and I cannot in good conscience sit quietly while my opponent continues spreading lies and fear.

The ad, entitled, Reckoning, will be available soon.

Changing the Course

I am sickened by the lack of leadership that resorts to such political dirty tricks, lies and distortions.  So I am offering up today my suggestions for a change of course, not only on Iraq but on other issues that matter like education, health care and alternative energy. (pdf link)  But before we can get to the point where a change of course is possible in these areas, Americans will have to reject the failures that have led us to the desperation evident in these Republican attack ads and in Iraq.  Unless we elect a Democratically controlled congress this fall there will be no changes in course and the Republican party will continue to play politics instead of leading and will continue govern in favor of big corporations.

The Final Countdown

Starting this coming Tuesday, I will embark on a whirlwind 7 day tour of the District, visiting countless towns in all 8 counties. You can follow my progress on my website in the newly created "On the Road" section of my website.

As we head into the homestretch, we can use all the help we can get. Over the past two years, the Netroots community has given me incredible support in the form of financial contributions. That is still as critical as ever--now even moreso with two new ads to keep on the air for then next 9 days.

What you can do
We are now 9 days away from the fall elections.  We all must keep hammering and GOTVing.  We could use more volunteers (link) and we could use your help to keep our ad with Eliot Spitzer on the air. (link)  Candidates across the country could use your help.  It's time to change course.

Submitted by Judy from NJ on October 29, 2006 - 6:10pm.

Eric. I was really happy to see your race added to the red to blue list. Keep on fighting.

rob's picture
Submitted by rob on October 29, 2006 - 7:02pm.

Congrats on getting on the Red To Blue list.


Submitted by In with the Blue on October 29, 2006 - 8:51pm.

You're the best - we're here for you.

We love who you are and what you stand for.
Have courage and keep up the good work.

IN WITH THE BLUE 2006

Stan4Clark's picture
Submitted by Stan4Clark on October 29, 2006 - 9:13pm.

Always good to "see" you, Eric. I'm looking forward to attending the swearing-in ceremony, along with Jay Fawcett, Angie Paccione, Ed Perlmutter, and Bill Winter.

Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?


Submitted by DonLCalifornia on October 29, 2006 - 11:10pm.

It's good to read that you are taking aim at the megacorps. For many years the corporate leadership has pushed an agenda that increasingly recognizes a corporation as a legal person. It is always time to reverse that process.

Submitted by Cristian Brown on October 30, 2006 - 1:06pm.

Hi Don,

I support Eric Massa and his positions.

However, corporations are "persons" under the law, and have been for ... oh ... a couple of centuries or more.  That's a long-standing principle of business law, and the "corporate veil" thus created benefits all of us.

Basically, if your cousin Bob wants to start a lawn care business, and he incorporates, and you invest $2,000 in his corporation to help him get his business going, the "corporate veil" -- the legal "personality" of the corporation -- protects YOU.  Let's say Bob's lawnmower accidentally runs over Aunt Harriet's prize Blue Moon Weeping Orchid.  Aunt Harriet sues Bob for damages, saying he destroyed her one-of-a-kind Orchid, which she had been nursing into bloom for six years at a cost of $30,000.  Aunt Harriet wins the lawsuit, and Bob's corporation owes Aunt Harriet $30,000.

But ... that lawsuit was against Bob's corporation.  Aunt Harriet can only recover damages from the corporate assets.  She can't come after Bob's personal assets ... and more's the point ... she can't come after YOUR personal assets (because you're an owner of that corporation).

Investors rely on the "corporate veil" -- the legal personality of the corporation -- to protect their personal assets from the wrongdoing of corporations in which they invest, but in which they may well have no operational control whatever.  The "corporate veil" makes capital more fluid, and enables more people to start or upgrade businesses.

There's a reason we treat corporations as legal "persons."  And it benefits all of us.

Cris Brown

Stan4Clark's picture
Submitted by Stan4Clark on October 30, 2006 - 1:51pm.

I'm not a lawyer, but it's one of the things I might do if I had it to do over. I'ma language/communication freak, and I realized late in the game that the law is an exercise in precise language. I very much admire the well-turned phrase and people who can express complicated matters in precise, clear language. Wes Clark is a past-master at it.

Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?


Submitted by DonLCalifornia on October 30, 2006 - 5:36pm.

A 'corporate veil' is NOT the same as a person.

That's demeaning to real people. That's the kind of equation that prompts extremists to use 'human shields'. Not a very far jump is it? Just reverse the order of responsibility. This is the very kind of personality culture thing that has led to such silent suffering in America.

Suing for a chunk of common corporate assets isn't the same as suing an individual. Affording human rights to a synthetic corporate personality is very, shall we say, short-sighted.

What happens when a corporation creates a real artificial intelligence? Are the the 'children of the corporate veil'?

Will companies sue each other for custody of synthetic electronic children?

Will we be forced to take General Dynamics vs. MIT to Supreme Court as a 21st Century version of Roe vs. Wade?

Let me repeat this again because it's important.

1) A 'corporate veil' isn't a person.

2) Suing for a portion of a corporate pot isn't the same as suing a person. Why? Because a common pool of money isn't a person. A person is much more than a collection of assets.

Yet you would afford legal personhood to a bank account.

Ninja! Kapow!

Stan4Clark's picture
Submitted by Stan4Clark on October 31, 2006 - 1:22am.

The fact that a corproation is a legal person is so well-grounded in law, that at least in election financing law in Colorado, the language has had to make a distinction between legal persons and "real persons."

Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?


Submitted by DonLCalifornia on October 31, 2006 - 2:09am.

Somewhere in the afterlife, Kruschev is laughing or screaming.

Giants in the playground.

Submitted by Bernie Quigley on October 30, 2006 - 7:51pm.

Great work, Eric. Marcos has you 53 to 42. (And Jim Webb 51 to Allen 46).

Submitted by In with the Blue on October 30, 2006 - 8:20pm.

You can do this thing, Eric!!

IN WITH THE BLUE 2006

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.